- (1.) This writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner, while assailing the validity of the orders dated 29-31.07.2010, whereby the Northern Regional Committee of National Council for Teachers Education (for short 'the NCTE' hereinafter) has withdrawn the recognition of the petitioner-institution for conducting B.Ed. Course. The learned counsel for the NCTE has put in appearance and raised preliminary objections that against the order dated 29- 31.07.2010 withdrawing the recognition of the institution for conducting B.E.Course passed by the NCTE, the petitioner-institution is having an alternate and efficatious remedy of filing statutory appeal as envisaged under section 18 of the National Council for Teachers Education Act, 1993 (for short 'the Act of 1993' hereinafter).
(2.) The learned counsel for the respondent- NCTE has submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Maa Vaishnao Devi Mahil Mahavidhyalaya vs. State of U.P., 2013 2 SCC 617 has held that in the matter of recognition, Courts should not interfere and the aggrieved party should avail the remedy of statutory appeal only.
(3.) At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner wants to withdraw this writ petition with liberty to file an appeal under Section 18 of the Act of 1993 against the impugned order.;